The Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative and Qualitative Approach for Investigating Washback in English Language Testing

Venny Karolina, Muaffi Alif, Sudharni Sudharni

Abstract


This paper aims to analyse the benefit and constraints of approaches for investigating washback in English language testing. This paper starts with the exploration of the concept of washback in English language testing. The notion of washback is related to the effect of testing on learning and teaching. This notion shows that washback research is associated with a causal relationship. A causal relationship might be investigated through quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method approaches. Each approach may have strengths as well as constraints. This paper concludes that quantitative and qualitative approaches contribute to the investigation of washback in English language testing. However, each approach also has some constraints. This writer concludes that a qualitative approach may suit well to investigate washback in English language testing. This approach may capture in-depth information on how and why teachers and students are affected by language testing in their teaching and learning process. However, the quantitative approach may excel in many participants so that the research results may be generalised. Each approach may contribute to washback research in English language testing; therefore, a mixed-method approach: qualitative and quantitative, is recommended to gain comprehensive finding for investigating washback in English language testing

Keywords


washback, English language testing, quantitative approach, qualitative approach, mixed-method study.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abu-alhaija, A. S. (2019). From epistemology to Structural Equation Modeling: An essential guide in understanding the principles of research philosophy in Selecting the Appropriate Methodology. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22587/ajbas.2019.13.9.12

Ali, M. M., & Hamid, M. O. (2020). Teaching English to the test: Why does negative washback exist within secondary education in Bangladesh? Language Assessment Quarterly, 17(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1717495

Alla Baksh, M. A. K., Mohd Sallehhudin, A. A., & Siti Hamin, S. (2019). Examining the factors mediating the intended washback of the english language school-based assessment: Pre-Service ESL teachers’ accounts. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 27(1), 51–68.

Arthur, J. (2012). Research methods and methodologies in education. SAGE Publications Inc.

Asma, A., Sabeen, Q., & Isabel, W. (2014). Investigating the washback effect of the Pakistani intermediate English examination. International Journal of English and Literature, 5(7), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.5897/ijel2013.0521

Austin, Z., & Sutton, J. (2014). Qualitative research: Getting started. Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 67(6), 436–440. https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v67i6.1406

Beikmahdavi, N. (2016). Washback in language testing: Review of related literature first. International Journal of Modern Language Teaching and Learning, 1(4), 130–136. www.ijmltl.com.

Caruana, E. J., Roman, M., Hernández-Sánchez, J., & Solli, P. (2015). Longitudinal studies. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 7(11), E537–E540. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.10.63

Cheng, L & Curtis, A. (2016). Washback or backwash: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. In A. Cheng, L, Watanabe, Y. & Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Cheng, L. (1998). Impact of a public English examination change on students’ perceptions and attitudes toward their English learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 24(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(98)00018-2

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications Inc.

De Vaus, D. (2013). Surveys in social research. Routledge.

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. SAGE Open, 4(1), 215824401452263. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633

Green, A. (2013). Washback in language assessment. International Journal of English Studies, 13(2), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.13.2.185891

Hayashi, P., Abib, G., & Hoppen, N. (2019). Validity in qualitative research: A processual approach. Qualitative Report, 24(1), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3443

Hung, S. T. A. (2012). A washback study on e-portfolio assessment in an English as a Foreign Language teacher preparation program. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.551756

Hung, S. T. A., & Huang, H. T. D. (2019). Standardized proficiency tests in a campus-wide English curriculum: a washback study. Language Testing in Asia, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-019-0096-5

Jung, H. (2019). The evolution of social constructivism in political science: Past to present. SAGE Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019832703

Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p26

Lauer, P. A. (2013). An education research primer: How to understand, evaluate and use it. Willey.

Lichterman, P., & Reed, I. A. (2015). Theory and contrastive explanation in ethnography. Sociological Methods and Research, 44(4), 585–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114554458

Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In Y. S. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln (Ed.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 97–128). SAGE Publications Inc.

Mertens, D. M. (2014). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method. SAGE Publications Inc.

Muijs, D. (2013). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. SAGE Publications Inc.

Mustika, N., & Lestari, R. (2020). Metode Bermain Peran dalam Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berbicara Bahasa Inggris Mahasiswa STIKes Perintis Padang. Edukatif : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 2(2), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v2i2.125

Neuman, W. L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson.

Palinkas, L. A. (2014). Causality and causal inference in social work: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Research on Social Work Practice, 24(5), 540–547. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1049731514536056

Phelps, R. P. (2016). Teaching to the test: A very large red herring. Nonpartisan Education Review, 12(1), 1–17.

Polesel, J., Dulfer, N., &Turnbull, M. (2012). The experience of Education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. University of Western Sydney.

Prasetyo, W. E., Kristin, F., & Anugraheni, I. (2019). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Cooperative Learning Tipe Group Investigation Untuk Meningkatkan Kerjasama Dan Hasil Belajar Mapel Ipa Siswa Kelas 4. Edukatif : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 1(2), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v1i2.7

Punch, K.F. & Oancea, A. (2014). Introduction to research methods in education. SAGE Publications Inc.

Scholtz, S. E., de Klerk, W., & de Beer, L. T. (2020). The use of research methods in psychological research: A systematised review. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.00001

Small, M. L. (2013). Causal thinking and ethnographic research. American J. of Sociology, 119, 597–601. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/675893?journalCode=ajs%0A%0A

Sultana, N. (2018). Investigating the Relationship between Washback and Curriculum Alignment: A Literature Review. Canadian Journal for New Scholars in Education, 9(2), 151–158. https://cjc-rcc.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjnse/article/view/53107

Sykes, B., Plümper, T., Troeger, V., & Neumayer, E. (2019). Case selection and causal inferences in qualitative comparative research. Plos One, 14(7), 0219727. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/3H5EDP

Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology ; How to choose a sampling technique International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM), 5(2), 18–27.

Taqizadeh, M., & Birjandi, P. (2015). What drives high school English teachers to teach the way they do? An Investigation of the washback effect of the university entrance examination in Iran. Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(2), 8–20. http://jallr.ir/index.php/JALLR/article/view/63

Tsagari, D. & Cheng, L. (2017). Washback, impact, and consequences revisited. In S. Shohamy, E., Or, L. & May (Ed.), Language testing and assessment. Springer Publishing Company.

Vasquez, M., & Stensland, M. (2016). Adopted children with reactive attachment disorder: A qualitative study on family processes. Clinical Social Work Journal, 44(3), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-015-0560-3

Wall, D. & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study. Language Testing, 10(1), 41–69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177%2F026553229301000103

Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions : Epistemological , theoretical , and methodological differences. European Journal of Education, 48(2), 311–325. https://about.jstor.org/terms




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v3i5.530

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Venny Karolina, Muaffi Alif, Sudharni Sudharni

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.